View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Groningen University of Groningen Ex instructione manualium ... ex vera ratione Irving, Andrew James McGregor Published in: Irrtum – Error – Erreur DOI: 10.1515/9783110592191-028 IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2018 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Irving, A. J. M. (2018). Ex instructione manualium ... ex vera ratione: The Correction of Liturgical Errors in the Late Middle Ages. In A. Speer, & M. Mauriège (Eds.), Irrtum – Error – Erreur (pp. 507-528). (Miscellanea Mediaevalia; Vol. 40). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110592191-028 Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 12-11-2019 “Ex instructione manualium […] ex vera ratione.” Correction of Liturgical Errors in the Late Middle Ages Andrew J. M. Irving (Groningen) “Many priests, even if they had taught [or, learnt] the office of the mass in one way, would go about celebrating it in another.”1 So begins rather abruptly Henry of Langenstein’s late-fourteenth-century treatise, the ‘Tractatus de modo procedendi in missa’, commonly entitled the ‘Secreta sacerdotum’. Henry con- tinues, “Their ignorance should not, therefore, be imputed to them, since they have learned hardly anything from their manuals. For this reason, I shall write down in order certain ways of celebrating the mass that I have seen that I do not like […] so that of the two paths the reader of this document might walk along the one more pleasing to 1 München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 18552a, foll. 197r-205r (hereafter, M), at fol. 197r: “Sacerdotes plures circa officium misse aliter procederent etsi aliter docuissent.” Two manuscripts of the text were consulted: M (fifteenth-century; provenance: Tegernsee), and Praha, Na´rodnı´ knihovna Cˇ eske´ republiky, XX.A.16 (formerly, Admont, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 335), URL: *http://v2.manuscriptorium.com/apps/main/en/index.php?request=show_tei_digidoc&docId =set04052430+ (last access on December 31, 2016), foll. 16v-22v. Early printed editions all derive from the fifteenth-century edition of Michael Lochmair, who appears to have altered little of Langenstein’s text; printed editions consulted: ed. Johann Froschauer, Augsburg 1497 (GW 12248), URL: *http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0003/bsb00039424/images/+ (last access on December 31, 2016); and ed. Hieronymus Höltzel, Nuremberg 1507 (VD16 H 2138), URL *http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0001/bsb00010071/image_1+ (last ac- cess on December 31, 2016). In registers of Langenstein’s works, the incipit is recorded slightly differently: “Sacerdotes plures circa officium missae aliter procederent si aliter didicissent ”; cf. T. Hohmann, Initienregister der Werke Heinrichs von Langenstein, in: Traditio 32 (1976), 399-426, at 417 (nr. 207); K. J. Heilig, Kritische Studien zum Schrifttum der beiden Heinriche von Hessen, in: Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 11 (1932), 105- 176, at 153 sq. Adolph Franz, referring to the work, concludes the incipit in accord with the manuscript tradition: “et si aliter docuissent”, but appends “[für didicissent ]”: id., Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Liturgie und des religiösen Volkslebens, Frei- burg i. Br. 1902, 520, nt 4. This variant appears, however, in none of the versions I have consulted. While the meaning “they had learnt” would seem to make more sense here than “they had taught” (whom did many priests teach about the celebration of the mass?), emendation of the textual tradition may not, in fact, be necessary since in late medieval Latin docere can be employed to mean “to learn”; cf. B. Löfstedt, Notizen eines Latinisten zu Luthers Predigten, in: A˚ rsbok of Vetenskaps-Societeten i Lund (1985), 24-42, at 31; P. Stotz, Handbuch zur lateinischen Sprache des Mittelalters, vol. 2: Bedeutungswandel und Wortbildung (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft II/5,2), München 2005, 146 (§ 74, 5); H. Antony (ed.), Mittellateinische Wörterbuch bis zum ausgehenden 13. Jahrhundert, vol. 3: D-E, München 2007, col. 912. Brought to you by | University of Groningen Authenticated Download Date | 5/23/19 10:45 AM 508 Andrew J. M. Irving him; some base their ways on the teaching of manuals, but the rest (and this is more commendable) base them on true reason”2 This essay shall explore exactly what the university theologian and administra- tor Henry of Langenstein (1327-1397) might have had in mind when he re- ferred to these two paths3. This is not quite as neat a dichotomy as truth and falsehood. Error is not named as such by the author, and at the outset Henry seems at least somewhat reticent to criticize overtly the liturgical practices of priests whom he has observed. Nevertheless, the implication of ritual error holds: we are left to understand that it is because priests hardly learn anything at all from their manuals that they celebrate the mass in a way that surely they would not choose if only they knew better, and Henry is only too willing, of course, to show them another path. Deficit on the one hand and benefit on the other are quietly but firmly implied when Henry wryly suggests that the choice between the two paths is entirely that of his reader. But Henry’s irenic (or perhaps ironic) tone can hardly mask three questions that underlie the compli- cated matter of manifold ritual practices and the methods, means, and execution of ritual training for late medieval priests: What is it that priests are doing wrong? What is wrong with the manuals? And how are these questions to be adjudicated? In the first section of this paper, we shall consider some examples of the sort of thing that Henry may have had in mind when he used of the term “manuale”, and the methods with which these texts sought to furnish priests who were anxious to avoid, correct, or adequately and appropriately cope with errors in the celebration of Eucharist. In the second section, we shall turn to Henry’s own concerns and methods as they are articulated in his short treatise, the ‘Secreta sacerdotum’. I. When attempting to understand what Henry might have meant by the term “manuale”, it would seem, at first, obvious to turn to the liturgical handbooks that styled themselves manualia as such. As least early as the twelfth century, this 2 M, fol. 197r: “ideo non est eis imputandum quod nesciunt, quia a suis manualibus minime didicerunt. Unde per ordinem scribam quosdam modos quos vidi mihi displicentes […] ut visis duabus viis hanc que magis placet lectori huius cartule gradiatur. Habent enim quidam ex instructione manualium, ceteri vero, quod laudabilius est, ex vera ratione.” 3 For Henry’s life, cf. G. Kreuzer, Heinrich von Langenstein: Studien zur Biographie und zu den Schismatraktaten unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Epistola pacis und der Epistola concilii pacis, Paderborn 1987, 47-149; T. Hohmann/G. Kreuzer, Heinrich von Langenstein, in: Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters Verfasserlexikon, vol. 3, Berlin-New York 21981, 763-773; F. Vandenbroucke, Henri de Langenstein, in: Dictionnaire de spiritualite´ asce´tique et mystique, vol. 7/1, Paris 1969, 215-219; O. Hartwig, Henricus de Langenstein dictus de Hassia: Zwei Untersuchungen über das Leben und die Schriften Heinrichs von Langenstein, Marburg 1857. Brought to you by | University of Groningen Authenticated Download Date | 5/23/19 10:45 AM “Ex instructione manualium […] ex vera ratione.” Correction of Liturgical Errors 509 term was employed to refer to, among other things, a book that could be held in the hand of the celebrant or his attendant during the celebration of a number of liturgical rituals4. The manuals contained in varying orders the rubrics, prayer texts, and chants for catechetical rites, baptisms, nuptial blessings, the visitation and anointing of the sick and dying, burials, and various other blessings and pastoral liturgies. The content of the manuale was not limited to occasional rites, however. The fourteenth-fifteenth century ‘Manuale ad usum sacerdotis heb- domedarii’, formerly belonging to the Carthusian community of St. Michael near Mainz5, contains, for example, antiphons, short readings, and prayers for use in the regular cycle of weekly liturgical celebrations throughout the year. Not infrequently, such handbooks included material relating to the celebration of the mass, including votive mass propers, prefaces, and the Eucharistic Canon (though not, usually, the full cycle of propers). Indeed, a comment on the word “manuale” by the anonymous glossator to Eberhard of Be´thune’s grammatical poem Graecismus suggests that for this fifteenth-century commentator at least the term was even primarily associated with Eucharistic celebrations: “inde ‘manu- ale’ idem est quod ‘missale’ quia in manuale omnia que sunt necessaria ad missam celebran- dam ad manum et promptitudinem habentur.”6 The growth of this genre in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries does not imply a single source, nor anything like textual uniformity. While such manuals often reflected in some wise the custom of the cathedral church of the diocese for which they were produced7, even within a diocese they were highly variable 4 Cf.